Abstract
Remotely-sensed canopy temperature from infrared thermometer (IRT) sensors has long been shown to be effective for detecting plant water stress. A field study was conducted to investigate peach tree responses to deficit irrigation which was controlled using canopy to air temperature difference (ΔT) during the postharvest period at the USDA-ARS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service) San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center in Parlier, California, USA. The experimental site consisted of a 1.6 ha early maturing peach tree orchard. A total of 18 IRT sensors were used to control six irrigation treatments including furrow, micro-spray, and surface drip irrigation systems with and without postharvest deficit irrigation. During the postharvest period in the 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 growing seasons, ΔT threshold values at mid-day was tested to trigger irrigation in three irrigation systems. The results showed that mid-day stem water potentials (ψ) for well irrigated trees were maintained at a range of −0.5 to −1.2 MPa while ψ of deficit irrigated trees dropped to lower values. Soil water content in deficit surface drip irrigation treatment was higher compared to deficit furrow and micro-spray irrigation treatments in 2012. The number of fruits and fruit weight from peach trees under postharvest deficit irrigation treatment were less than those well-watered trees; however, no statistically significant (at the p < 0.05 level) reduction in fruit size or quality was found for trees irrigated by surface drip and micro-spray irrigation systems by deficit irrigation. Beside doubles, we found an increased number of fruits with deep sutures and dimples which may be a long-term (seven-year postharvest regulated deficit irrigation) impact of deficit irrigation on this peach tree variety. Overall, deployment of IRT sensors provided real-time measurement of canopy water status and the information is valuable for making irrigation management decisions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Well irrigated peach trees maintained mid-day stem water potential from −0.5 to −1.2 MPa.
- Taxon
- Peach Tree
Prunus persicat0 - Outcome
- mid-day stem water potentialse0
- Value
- −0.5 to −1.2 MPae0
- Qualifier
- well irrigated treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mid-day stem water potentials (ψ) for well irrigated trees were maintained at a range of −0.5 to −1.2 MPa”
t0“Peach Tree”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigated peach trees had lower mid-day stem water potential than well irrigated trees.
- Taxon
- Peach TreePrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatede0
- Outcome
- stem water potentialse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- well irrigated treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mid-day stem water potentials (ψ) for well irrigated trees were maintained at a range of −0.5 to −1.2 MPa while ψ of deficit irrigated trees dropped to lower values”
t0“Peach Tree”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, deficit surface drip irrigation retained higher soil water content than deficit furrow and micro-spray irrigation.
- Taxon
- Peach TreePrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- deficit surface drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Soil water contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- in 2012e0
- Comparator
- deficit furrow and micro-spray irrigation treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil water content in deficit surface drip irrigation treatment was higher compared to deficit furrow and micro-spray irrigation treatments in 2012.”
t0“Peach Tree”
Claim · model-written summary
Postharvest deficit irrigation reduced the number of peach fruits relative to well-watered trees.
- Taxon
- peach treesPrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- postharvest deficit irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of fruitse0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Comparator
- well-watered treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of fruits and fruit weight from peach trees under postharvest deficit irrigation treatment were less than those well-watered trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Postharvest deficit irrigation reduced peach fruit weight relative to well-watered trees.
- Taxon
- peach treesPrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- postharvest deficit irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- fruit weighte0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Comparator
- well-watered treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of fruits and fruit weight from peach trees under postharvest deficit irrigation treatment were less than those well-watered trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation under surface drip and micro-spray did not significantly reduce peach fruit size.
- Taxon
- Peach TreePrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- no statistically significante0
- Qualifier
- surface drip and micro-spray irrigation systemse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no statistically significant (at the p < 0.05 level) reduction in fruit size or quality was found for trees irrigated by surface drip and micro-spray irrigation systems by deficit irrigation”
t0“Peach Tree”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation under surface drip and micro-spray did not significantly reduce peach fruit quality.
- Taxon
- Peach TreePrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- fruit size or qualitye0
- Direction
- no statistically significante0
- Qualifier
- surface drip and micro-spray irrigation systemse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no statistically significant (at the p < 0.05 level) reduction in fruit size or quality was found for trees irrigated by surface drip and micro-spray irrigation systems by deficit irrigation”
t0“Peach Tree”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term postharvest deficit irrigation may have increased peach fruits with deep sutures and dimples.
- Taxon
- peach treePrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- number of fruits with deep sutures and dimplese0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- may be a long-term (seven-year postharvest regulated deficit irrigation) impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an increased number of fruits with deep sutures and dimples which may be a long-term (seven-year postharvest regulated deficit irrigation) impact of deficit irrigation on this peach tree variety”
Claim · model-written summary
IRT sensors provided real-time measurement of peach canopy water status useful for irrigation management.
- Taxon
- Peach TreePrunus persicat0
- Outcome
- real-time measurement of canopy water statuse0
- Qualifier
- valuable for making irrigation management decisionse0
Not reportedComparatorValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“deployment of IRT sensors provided real-time measurement of canopy water status and the information is valuable for making irrigation management decisions”
t0“Peach Tree”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Prunus persica (peach)Results differ
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
51 papers more in this group
See all 55 papers →irrigation · quality: general · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.